A linguistic construction of a research gap in reports of randomised controlled trials: A systemic functional perspective

In clinical research, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are considered to be "the gold standard" for evaluating treatments. Accordingly, RCT reporting in top English-medium medical journals is specifically regulated by The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Statement. However, although the CONSORT Statement prescribes the content items that are to be included in a report, little guidance is offered on how the content can be communicated effectively. This paper explores a linguistic construction of a research gap in the introductory sections of medical research articles that report on RCTs (i.e., RCT reports), which has been identified as crucial in the process of RCT justification. In this study, a sample of Introduction sections extracted form recently published RCT reports was analysed using a systemic functional linguistic (SFL) approach to genre and evaluation. The findings indicate that RCT report writers tend to create a research gap by embedding the rhetorical structures of three arguing genres - expositions, dis-cussions, and challenges - into their research warrants. The results of this study carry pedagogical implications for RCT report writing training.